How much of the Goldberg hate.....

[johnbragg]

How much of the Goldberg hate is because he was a WCW guy, and was only a legit superstar for a year or two (1998-2000)? I think if it were Stone Cold Steve Austin, or The Rock, or Samoa Joe or Kurt Angle or Dean Ambrose who marched into the ring and squashed Lesnar, a lot of the Goldberg haters would be marking out instead. You'd still have the argument that it should be a young guy in a star-making moment, but there wouldn't be as much heat.

What the Goldberg marks don't understand is, if you weren't watching WCW in 1998, it can be hard to take Goldberg seriously, as anything but an undefeated-streak gimmick, a less incoherent, less self-destructive version of the Ultimate Warrior.

Goldberg on Youtube or the WWE Network isn't much to see--no great promos, no great matches, just the same squash over and over. His WCW heel turn flopped, his RAW run never quite worked with the audience. His WM match vs Lesnar was legendarily bad, and was crapped on by the arena crowd. Without the undefeated streak, you've got a guy who's not great on the mike and a one-trick pony in the ring.

Vince's job isn't fundamentally to make sense, or tell good stories, or make us happy. It's to make money. Yes, in the long term, making sense and telling good stories and making us happy should slowly-but-surely grow the audience and make him money.

I think Vince's strategy has been to use LEsnar to bring in the UFC/MMA crowd. If that hasn't worked by now, it's not going to work. If UFC fans who were never WWF fans or who drifted away haven't signed up for the WWE Network to see The Beast "Eat. Sleep. Conquer. Repeat." they're not going to.

Goldberg is an attempt to reach the old Nitro fanbase that Vince was never able to bring in after WCW folded. I don't know if it's going to work financially or not.

 

[Jack-Hammer]

I couldn't care less if Goldberg was a WCW, WWE, ECW or indie creation. None of the "I don't like this guy because he wasn't a creation of my favorite company" stuff has ever been part of the equation for me.

I don't "hate" Goldberg, I've just never believed or bought into all the hype surrounding him because he's a creation of the WCW hype machine; they did it masterfully and I don't begrudge anyone for that at all but I'm just not, nor was I ever, a fan of Goldberg because he simply wasn't a very good pro wrestler. He had a great look and intensity, no question about that, but that was all that he had; once you got him in a match that wasn't against a jobber and lasted more than a few minutes, his limits became glaringly obvious.

Had Stone Cold, Angle, or the Rock marked into the ring and obliterated Lesnar, I'd have been just as upset because I see this as a wasted opportunity. As I stated in one of the posts in the thread I started after Survivor Series, what happened Sunday is an example of why so many fans don't have as high of an opinion of modern stars as they do of the Attitude Era: Attitude Era stars are sometimes brought back and are put over at the expense of modern stars rather than using those stars to give rubs to younger guys who're helping carry the company. Those guys also are given vastly more creative freedom and input than 95% of stars today.

Now we have the Royal Rumble coming up and Goldberg will come in and decimate any of the modern guys put in front of him whether it be Reigns, Rollins, Owens, Ambrose, Cesaro, Sheamus, Styles or whomever. If Goldberg gets eliminated, it'll probably be due to some sort of shenanigans at the hands of Lesnar, either as a competitor or as a guy who'll just run out and eliminate Goldberg to prevent him from getting a title shot, thereby leading up to another bout at WrestleMania. If Goldberg isn't eliminated, though I think there's almost no chance of that, then there's a strong possibility that he decimates whomever is WWE Universal Champion at WrestleMania, which I'm guessing will be Kevin Owens, and yet another modern star is put down to add to the legacy of an Attitude Era relic.

 

[Big Nick Dudley]

There are lots of reasons for the irrational hatred of Goldberg. And remember, the hatred exists on the internet. That live audience definitely didn't hate Goldberg.

Internet fans like the guys who do the flippies. They enjoy 20 minute matches where guys aimlessly run around, crashing into one another, with neither ever truly having the upper hand. More moves and zero common sense are the staples of a great match in the eyes of the internet fan.

I also think some of the hatred comes from ignorance. A lot of younger fans have no idea how big of a deal Goldberg actually was and you can't necessarily blame them for that.

I must say, though, I'm very impressed with the live audience and how they're reacting to Goldberg. They're actually giving the story a chance, which is very surprising.

 

[ShinChan]

I don't get the Goldberg hate.

Goldberg did the same to Brock what Brock had been doing to majority of the roster. Just look at Brock Lesnar's recent matches and I am sure that there are more squashes only. And the squash ain't against a jobber like R-Truth but top talents like Dean Ambrose, Randy Orton and Seth Rollins.

Brock squashing Cena wasn't good either. People say that Goldberg buried the entire roster since he squashed Brock Lesnar who had gone over most of the credible roster. But Cena had also gone over every one but got squashed by Brock Lesnar. Didn't Brock bury the whole roster then?

Brock squashed Rollins while he was the ultimate champion of the company. What was that?

In simple words, Brock Lesnar got BrockLesnar'ed.

 

[johnbragg]

I couldn't care less if Goldberg was a WCW, WWE, ECW or indie creation. None of the "I don't like this guy because he wasn't a creation of my favorite company" stuff has ever been part of the equation for me.

I don't mean that we hate him personally. As far as I know he's a great guy and a fine citizen and a good father and everyone's favorite neighbor. But none of that really matters.

Just that we're not marking out for him destroying Lesnar, we're not enjoying this storyline and we find it illogical. We're not interested in the Extreme Flame Dorito Tacos they're advertising--we came to our favorite restaurant for the lamb.

I don't "hate" Goldberg, I've just never believed or bought into all the hype surrounding him because he's a creation of the WCW hype machine;

Right. If you didn't mark out for Goldberg in the first place in 1998, you don't feel the memberberries. If you DID mark out for Goldberg in 1998, maybe you do.

I'm trying to say that if you didn't mark out for Goldberg in 1998, (I didn't) then it might be hard to understand what Vince is trying to do here.

they did it masterfully and I don't begrudge anyone for that at all but I'm just not, nor was I ever, a fan of Goldberg because he simply wasn't a very good pro wrestler. He had a great look and intensity, no question about that, but that was all that he had; once you got him in a match that wasn't against a jobber and lasted more than a few minutes, his limits became glaringly obvious.

Right. If you saw more of his RAW work than his Nitro work, he seems a lot more like Scott Steiner than like Steve Austin.

Had Stone Cold, Angle, or the Rock marked into the ring and obliterated Lesnar, I'd have been just as upset because I see this as a wasted opportunity.

Logically what you're saying is true. But search your feelings. Are you sure it's 100% true? You woudn't have at least some warm fuzzies if your favorite guy from 10-15 years ago was the guy who squashed Lesnar and tickled your memberberries?

As I stated in one of the posts in the thread I started after Survivor Series, what happened Sunday is an example of why so many fans don't have as high of an opinion of modern stars as they do of the Attitude Era: Attitude Era stars are sometimes brought back and are put over at the expense of modern stars rather than using those stars to give rubs to younger guys who're helping carry the company. Those guys also are given vastly more creative freedom and input than 95% of stars today.

100% true. "CM Punk beating the Undertaker just wouldn't be credible"! CM Punk was the world champion at the time. So he should be able to beat ANYBODY. (Maybe he doesn't beat EVERYBODY, but there's nobody he CAN'T beat clean.) If Jeff Hardy could ragdoll around the ring for 15-20 minutes in 2001, then CM Punk could have taken anything Undertaker dished out for a similar time, before the 10-years older Undertaker started showing signs of fatigue, allowing the younger Punk to get the advantage.

Sorry for the digression, I'm just still irritated at that one. Because maybe, just maybe, if it had been Punk that beat the Undertaker at Wrestlemania, maybe he'd still be here.

Now we have the Royal Rumble coming up and Goldberg will come in and decimate any of the modern guys put in front of him ..... and yet another modern star is put down to add to the legacy of an Attitude Era relic.

This is very, very true.

There are lots of reasons for the irrational hatred of Goldberg. And remember, the hatred exists on the internet. That live audience definitely didn't hate Goldberg.

This is a good point. Always remember, if internet echo chambers were accurate barometers, Ron Paul would have been President.

Internet fans like the guys who do the flippies. They enjoy 20 minute matches where guys aimlessly run around, crashing into one another, with neither ever truly having the upper hand. More moves and zero common sense are the staples of a great match in the eyes of the internet fan.

The internet fan has also come up after the death of kayfabe, and in a time when wrestling is competing with MMA on the one hand and reality TV on the other hand. So it fits the niche between real combat sport and full out soap opera drama. What's left is live-action combat sports too dangerous to do in real combat--but hella impressive to watch, and long-match storytelling.

I also think some of the hatred comes from ignorance. A lot of younger fans have no idea how big of a deal Goldberg actually was and you can't necessarily blame them for that.

It's not the younguns' fault that Goldberg isn't very impressive on Youtube. It's not unfair to say that Goldberg combines Hulk Hogan's moveset with Lesnar's promo ability.

I must say, though, I'm very impressed with the live audience and how they're reacting to Goldberg. They're actually giving the story a chance, which is very surprising.

Remember what you yourself said about the live audience and the internet audience. I think a lot of the people who bought tickets were pretty fanatical fans in the Attitude Era, and haven't necessarily stayed fanatical fans. They're not sitting here, wondering, "Okay what's next, where does this all go" and wondering if pro wrestling ever gives us a new star on the mic and in the ring who makes it fun to be a wrestling fan again.

Which is also why Vince doesn't have to cater to us. He's getting our money whether we're happy or not.

 

[johnbragg]

I don't get the Goldberg hate.

Some of it isn't logical. Some of it is that Goldberg isn't "our guy." In my opinion, anyway.

Goldberg did the same to Brock what Brock had been doing to majority of the roster.

Agreed. But there's a part of our brains that confuses kayfabe and reality in the interests of making our stories work out logically, the way stories are supposed to. And that part of the brain says that Lesnar "earned it" with his WWE run and his UFC titles (and maybe in JApan a little bit.)

Also Lesnar has been around WWE for a few years now, so we're used to it.

Just look at Brock Lesnar's recent matches and I am sure that there are more squashes only. And the squash ain't against a jobber like R-Truth but top talents like Dean Ambrose, Randy Orton and Seth Rollins.

First, I don't think LEsnar squashed any main eventers in under 5 minutes. I could easily be wrong, I just don't remember. Even Lesnar has lost a couple of matches since coming back, but not like this.

Brock squashing Cena wasn't good either. People say that Goldberg buried the entire roster since he squashed Brock Lesnar who had gone over most of the credible roster. But Cena had also gone over every one

Cena also did and does lose to a lot of people, though. IT's not the 2005 Reign of the SuperCena anymore and hasn't been for a long time.

but got squashed by Brock Lesnar. Didn't Brock bury the whole roster then?

Yes. Which caused some grumbling, but we figured that eventually, some post-Class of 2002 star would bring down LEsnar.

Brock squashed Rollins while he was the ultimate champion of the company. What was that?

Apparently that was the #1 guy in the company (world champ) getting laid out by the guy who lost to the guy who has been retired for five or six times as long as he was on top.

In simple words, Brock Lesnar got BrockLesnar'ed.

Yup. As the focus and the attention recedes further and further from the guys who headline Raw and Smackdown week-in and week-out, year round.

A long time ago, when Hulk Hogan had his 2002 Hulkamania run, sure he beat a lot of current stars. And do you remember what happened then? He lost to the 2002 King of the Ring on Smackdown, clean 1-2-3 in the middle of the ring, Brock LEsnar. And post-match, LEsnar kept brutalizing the 1980s icon, busting him open. And when he was done, he wiped the blood of the broken legend across his chest.

THAT'S how you use old stars to build new stars.

 

[Kodo Sawaki]

Goldberg is an attempt to reach the old Nitro fanbase that Vince was never able to bring in after WCW folded. I don't know if it's going to work financially or not.

Vince couldnt care less about Nitro fanbase, if he cared he wouldnt let his son in law destroy Sting in his first match with all those laughable interferences. Vince cares about draw power. Apparently his bussiness feeling tells him that there is money in Goldberg so he let him annihilate something he created to be unbeatanable monster. And by the way internet is buzzing these days looks like he made the right call. It created something that WWE hoped to do, to bring attention and make more money next time Goldberg is around.

 

[The Yes Guy]

I've never understood the whole veterans putting young guys over thing.

It does nothing, absolutely nothing for anyone. It'll only be weeks until people start bitching about how much of a wasted opportunity it was. The only time I remember someone being put over was during Kevin Owens debut.

Also, i don't see the harm in veterans coming back for a nostalgia run. If the guy has a nice enough in ring psychology, i couldn't care less about his in ring skills. It's the story that matters.

When this guy (a guy who's been out for 12 years) gets a pop louder than the entire roster, we should understand that this internet generated Goldberg hate is absolutely stupid.

 

[Xpyred013]

My dislike for Goldberg has nothing to do with him being from WCW. I was a Goldberg fan when he was in WCW. I also had some hope for him in WWE but of course they ruined that.

My dislike for Goldberg comes from the fact that a year or two ago the guy was scheduled for the Big Event NY meet and greet. I wouldn't mind paying 80 dollars to see him because i did pay the 80 to see Lita the year prior. I didn't pay 120 to see HBK and i liked HBK for a while. But Goldberg was asking for crazy ass amounts like 400 + dollars. I'm sorry but the Goldberg hype train died when WCW killed his streak and then he injured himself on a limo window. The guy hadn't been in the ring for 10 years and you want me to cough up 400 for a pic, an autograph and whatever else? Clearly a greedy bastard.

 

[BestSportsEntertainer]

The entire point of building up Lesnar was so a young guy could defeat him and get a massive rub.

Goldberg was already established and didn't need it. The rub was wasted.

Also it makes the current rosters look like chumps considering Goldberg hasn't wrestled in 12 years.

It has nothing to do with Goldberg being a WCW guy.

 

[OYDK]

The entire point of building up Lesnar was so a young guy could defeat him and get a massive rub.

No, you're assuming. WWE never said, never even implied that that's what they were building Lesnar for.

Goldberg was already established and didn't need it. The rub was wasted.

This idea of the "rub" is outdated. WWE constantly gives young guys big wins and then doesn't do shit with them. If somebody can't get over at Lesnar's level, they don't deserve the rub. That's the only way a rub works. See Hulk Hogan/Andre the Giant.

Also it makes the current rosters look like chumps considering Goldberg hasn't wrestled in 12 years.

No it doesn't. Goldberg has always been able to squash everybody he got in the ring with. Everybody. This just shows that 12 years hasn't changed that.

It has nothing to do with Goldberg being a WCW guy.

I'm sure some of it does.

 

[StaRRStruck]

From actually witnessing the event I get the shock value was real but there's a few problems I have with the build of the actually story. Now if there was to be an actual rematch in place, it should be happening at Roadblock (unlikely) or the Royal Rumble NOT WrestleMania. No one wants to see this match at WrestleMania, that is a time of year for both part timers to indulge in new feuds.

Goldberg's win offered good storytelling for Brock, where the beast is conquered for underestimating his opponent. But it dilutes Brock's dominance so much now that even in "wrestling" Goldberg seems more superior the win should've still be rewarded to someone on the active roster. If this feud was a little bit shorter than where it's going I wouldn't be that upset, if it ends up in the title picture I will be livid. Goldberg may be a one trick pony, but if he was just doing the big four he could fill out two years worth of feuds with the potential talent he could work with: Cena, Taker, Y2J, Styles, Joe, Rollins, Reigns and Orton are just some that come to mind. WWE is wasting their time if they only invest Goldberg's last run around Brock and the title.

 

[Vanilla Midget]

I don't think the WCW guy thing has anything to do with it. We see way more fond posts for WCW than negative ones on this site and others. Any Goldberg hate stems from hate of the Part-Timer Era and Survivor Series not fulfilling expectations.

Everyone and their brother expected Brock to go over in a match that went for about 10 to 15 minutes tops, maybe no contest to keep the feud going. Instead we saw a squash where the other guy won.

The big issue there is Brock was carrying The Streak pin, as well as the I destroyed John Cena pin that everyone was hoping would go to a full-time talent. That's really where the hate is. It's not complicated and it has many roots including the fact that it's gone to a 49 year old man who we'll see maybe only a handful of times before he either suffers a career ending injury ala Sting or retires.

If it had gone to a 20 something, even a guy in his late 30s we could have counted on a few great years out of the guy who pinned Brock. Goldberg is a guy who hasn't wrestled in a decade and never spent any time building indie cred. Most people who hate him are hipsters.

I'm just glad Brock didn't destroy him. I really could care less that they wasted the Brock pinfall. Maybe Goldberg will draw a bit, hopefully a full time guy pins him on his way out. I'm just glad that maybe we can finally stop having these awful Brock ruins everyone matches.

Why couldn't Brock have just had a match with Kofi at Beast in the East? Why couldn't he have an actual match vs Ambrose, Orton, basically anyone that wasn't Undertaker? It's gotten so stale, at least this is different.

Or it wont be. Goldberg may very well just lose the Rumble due to Brock and face Lesnar again at Mania, get destroyed there, then what was the point?

Either way, people wanted to see a hard working, full-time and internet favoured guy to do the honours on Brock. At least it wasn't Roman, amirite guys?

 

[#tamale]

How much of the Goldberg hate is because he was a WCW guy, and was only a legit superstar for a year or two (1998-2000)? I think if it were Stone Cold Steve Austin, or The Rock, or Samoa Joe or Kurt Angle or Dean Ambrose who marched into the ring and squashed Lesnar, a lot of the Goldberg haters would be marking out instead.

Doesn't make sense for Austin, Rock, Joe, Angle, or Ambrose to squash Lesnar. Goldberg does because that's part of his legacy. Lesnar took that for granted and Goldberg made him pay.

You'd still have the argument that it should be a young guy in a star-making moment, but there wouldn't be as much heat.

Stars aren't made by getting wins over certain opponents. Austin did not beat Bret in their 2 major matches against each other, but the fans latched onto Austin because he was a character they started to love.

I think Vince's strategy has been to use LEsnar to bring in the UFC/MMA crowd. If that hasn't worked by now, it's not going to work. If UFC fans who were never WWF fans or who drifted away haven't signed up for the WWE Network to see The Beast "Eat. Sleep. Conquer. Repeat." they're not going to.

Vince used Lesnar because ESPN wanted in on the WWE publicity, and Lesnar's decision of WWE or UFC was major news at the time, as well as his decision for his fight this past summer. Cena aside, Lesnar is their most popular commodity and has crossover appeal. He makes them money.

Goldberg is an attempt to reach the old Nitro fanbase that Vince was never able to bring in after WCW folded. I don't know if it's going to work financially or not.

Goldberg has become an instant star again after Survivor Series. Think about that. They used Goldberg's history of dominating opponents in less than 5 minutes and had Lesnar as the perfect opponent. We weren't expecting a Goldberg match and we got a Goldberg match. That's why there was shock.

To the question of why there is Goldberg hate. It's simply because for years and years ex-WCW talent and producers/executives and the like have buried Goldberg in shoot interviews and social media. WWE talent as well. It seems to have gone away with this current WWE run. Time heals all wounds.

 

[Kizzani]

I spent years watching WWE and catching a Few WCW shows. But it wasn't until the nWo took over that had me jumping all over the WCW.

So much of it was great and overshadowed by WWE, BWO, LWO, Jericho and his list of 5000 and 1 moves he knew, proving he had more talent than Dean Malkino.

Then the PPV's like Halloween Havoc and Wargames (which trumps any gimmick PPV WWE has ever offered, blows my mind they haven't used it. Now would be great with the roster split.)

Then you toss in Goldberg, who came in and smashed as big stars have done in the past. But undefeated in a predetermined match setting for years, doesn't make much sense. He wasn't a dominant football player, then he dominated WCW quickly and efficiently, as if all the talent who put years and years in this craft are supposed to roll over to this nothing.

Then after wrestling what? color commentary, he did nothing, he blew it in japan. Go back and watch his matches, they are crap. He has horrible mechanics and sells like a goof.

Then he takes a 12 year break never touches a ring, yet he can come in an dominate a person like Lesnar. A decorated champion from all over, a UFC champion but looks like Elllsworth vs Roman Reigns.

Now he wants a title run....OMFG give me a break. Then what he wins the title and officially retires? He can't have a match with anyone, Spear, Spear Jackhammer every match so he is unbeatable? Yeah wtfever.

 

[I_Like_All_Wrestling]

I don't think him being a WCW guy has anything to do with it. Jericho is a WCW guy and people love him. Flair was a WCW guy. Sting. Rey. Eddie. Sure they all did more time in WWE than Goldberg, but I don't think any fan is like "boo a WCW guy!"

I think it's a combination of things:
a) He's old and looks old. Brock looks like a MONSTER. Goldberg looks like an in shape dad.
b) He outright said he trained for 6/7 weeks. So a guy who hasn't wrestled in over a decade can decimate a guy who was a legit UFC champ and manhandled everyone on the roster?
c) He doesn't deserve it. This depends on your personal thoughts. But a guy like AJ is undersized and has worked years and years to prove everyone wrong to even make it to the WWE, and a guy like Goldberg doesn't really care and is in it for the money.
d) He's not cool. Come on. He talks about "being a superhero for the kids" - is that what fans want? I don't think so.
e) He's not good. Sure, this is subjective. But, he's a standard 5 move guy. Sure he's athletic, but he's not a great wrestler.

I don't know, just my opinion. He is a name, and casual fans would watch for him, so you get what you want there if you're WWE.

 

[Noshowers]

I don't think him being a WCW guy has anything to do with it. Jericho is a WCW guy and people love him. Flair was a WCW guy. Sting. Rey. Eddie. Sure they all did more time in WWE than Goldberg, but I don't think any fan is like "boo a WCW guy!"

I think it's a combination of things:
a) He's old and looks old. Brock looks like a MONSTER. Goldberg looks like an in shape dad.
b) He outright said he trained for 6/7 weeks. So a guy who hasn't wrestled in over a decade can decimate a guy who was a legit UFC champ and manhandled everyone on the roster?
c) He doesn't deserve it. This depends on your personal thoughts. But a guy like AJ is undersized and has worked years and years to prove everyone wrong to even make it to the WWE, and a guy like Goldberg doesn't really care and is in it for the money.
d) He's not cool. Come on. He talks about "being a superhero for the kids" - is that what fans want? I don't think so.
e) He's not good. Sure, this is subjective. But, he's a standard 5 move guy. Sure he's athletic, but he's not a great wrestler.

I don't know, just my opinion. He is a name, and casual fans would watch for him, so you get what you want there if you're WWE.

While others in this thread are just grasping at straws or actually trying to say dumb things in order to try to anger and "troll" people, your post is actually the most factual and sums up the disappointment best.

1. He is old. He is 49 and hadn't wrestled anywhere in 12 years.
2. While being old and not wrestling, he squashed Brock Lesner who virtually killed the Undertaker and ended his Wrestlemania streak before taking John Cena to Suplex City.
3. While being old, not wrestling for 12 years he is all of a sudden handed a match with Brock Lesner and gets a win that other full time stars certainly could have benefited from. This "deserving" point is subjective.
4. Not sure about this one, the guy cusses and wears a jacket from the 90s. Hipsters love the 90s
5. While in his prime 98% of his matches were squashes, virtually the same match. Goldberg being a good wrestler can't be argued by any unbiased fan. He was very limited in the ring. Now he is 49 and clearly hasn't worked on his wrestling, therefore he is not currently good in the ring. People like Baron Corbin, Braun Strauman, and even Kane can put on a better "match" in the ring, what Goldberg has going for him is his name and his legacy.

Which again is all Goldberg was. He was a draw. He is a draw. Being a draw can't be overlooked (George Foreman got a Boxing title match against Michael Moorer because he could bring in the most money, happens everywhere).

In terms of my enjoyment I look at the wrestling. I would match rather see Kevin Owens go 15 minutes and lose to Lesner then see Goldberg squash anyone in 90 seconds. I originally thought WWE called for the squash to protect Bill's health. Sting had just been injured and Shane was hurt earlier that night as well. Just let the music play, fans go wild, then give him a pin and sail off into the sunset. I was 100% onboard for that and supported it.

 

[johnbragg]

I don't think him being a WCW guy has anything to do with it. Jericho is a WCW guy and people love him. Flair was a WCW guy. Sting. Rey. Eddie. Sure they all did more time in WWE than Goldberg, but I don't think any fan is like "boo a WCW guy!"

When this many people misunderstand me, it's probably my fault.

I"m not trying to say the reaction is "Boo! WCW guy! Boo, his, f-- Atlanta! ECDub!, Mick Foley Put My Ass in This Seat!"

I'm trying to say that a lot of the reaction is based on the fact that, for a large part of the fanbase, Goldberg never built up any credibility. Unless you were watching WCW at the time, Goldberg nostalgia doesn't do anything for you. "Remember when Goldberg was awesome?" No, we don't remember. And, unlike an 80s Flair or Dusty Rhodes or Hulk Hogan promo, or the "third man" at Bash at the Beach or classic NWO or DX segments, it doesn't translate at all on youtube. That's a contrast to just about anyone else you could imagine in that role.

For the people that liked this, my theory is that WWE is tickling their residual affection for Goldberg and classic WCW Nitro. For the people that didn't like this, there is no residual affection.

It's almost like when a girl likes a guy, things he does are sweet and cute etc. Then she doesn't like him, and those exact same things are cloying and annoying and terrible.

EDIT: Three of the big counterexamples to "WCW guy" are Jericho, Mysterio and Eddie Guerrero. But those guys haven't been "WCW guys" for a long, long time. I'm pretty sure they've each spent more time in WWF/E than WCW. (Guerrero maybe not, but he won a world title at Wrestlemania as a WWE guy.)

The other example is Sting, and there are a bunch of differences.
1. Sting was a top guy for over a decade in NWA (JCP) and WCW, not a one-trick pony like Goldberg. (His TNA time gets him no credit, sorry)
2. Sting didn't come in and squash a main event guy, much less a special attraction guy who's on a different level than the main eventers.

EDIT 2: NoShowers, all of your points are valid and logical. BUt I'm saying that, because it's not a guy the WWF/E audience has affection for, we're unforgiving of these things. If it were an equally old Steve Austin or Hulk Hogan or--the next few examples I thought of are all dead. Mick Foley, Rock, maybe, um, Jesse Ventura? Bret Hart?

Bret Hart would be a good example. If WWE set up a Bret Hart comeback for LEsnar to squash Hart, and Hart shocked the world by reversing LEsnar into the sharpshooter and making him tap out, many of us who are vociferously arguing against old Attitude Era relics going over current monsters would be marking out like little girls at a Shawn Mendes concert.

 

[#tamale]

That makes no sense. A large part of the fanbase is exactly the same fanbase that watched Goldberg when they were younger. That demographic of 25-40 year old males now remember Goldberg and have fond memories of him. That is a a large demographic for WWE and the reason the reactions to him have been mostly positive. With Goldberg talking about his son, he is trying to hit a younger demographic so he can be insanely popular with them as well.

As I stated before, the reason there is some hate is due to the fact of how his ex-employees talked about him and they buried him any chance they had.

 

[JoeMallard]

I dont care two shits for Goldberg, most overrated wrestler of all time. Squash matches are completely boring and I've never liked them or Goldberg. All this return crap is just so Vince can have his small percentage of viewership rise for a couple months, if that.